Why does RosettaNet have to use BPSS or BPEL4WS?

Digg This!     StumbleUpon     Del.icio.us

RELATED CONTENT BPEL BPELTutorial Co-evolution of BPMN and BPEL drives BPM in SOA settings UML modeler includes BPMN support BPM Special Report: What you model is what you monitor Verizon uses BPEL app to cut down on code, check for fraud, and go green Visual orchestration tool addresses event processing and SOA SOA, BPEL working on the railroad UML and SOA the Microsoft way Oracle links SOA, data services, BI and BAM Online real estate SOA moves into BPEL BPEL Research RosettaNet Benefits of RosettaNet RosettaNet and Business Process Management Future of RosettaNet RosettaNet's place in the overall Web services picture BPEL4WS vs. RosettaNet What can we gain from RosettaNet-based Web services? Are BPEL4WS and RosettaNet in competition? Can RosettaNet-based Web services improve collaboration between electronic suppliers and OEM's? RosettaNet Research

RELATED GLOSSARY TERMS Terms from Whatis.com − the technology online dictionary BPEL  (SearchSOA.com)

RELATED RESOURCES 2020software.com, trial software downloads for accounting software, ERP software, CRM software and business software systems Search Bitpipe.com for the latest white papers and business webcasts Whatis.com, the online computer dictionary

Excellent point, and I agree with this idea.

First, I need to acknowledge that I am quite impressed with RosettaNet's dedication to its current core competency: business process specifications to get trading partners to conduct e-business. When RosettaNet was launched, several key components like message packaging, routing, transport, business vocabularies, business process description languages, etc., did not exist. So RosettaNet built these components with the understanding that as soon as a suitable standard becomes available, RosettaNet would utilize that standard instead. For example, currently RosettaNet is looking at adopting the Business Process Specification Schema (BPSS), the ebXML Messaging Service (ebMS), and the ebXML Registry / Repository.

Conceptually, RosettaNet should be able to focus on the business aspects of the business process and express it in any of the business process languages (like BPSS, BPEL4WS etc). In reality however, BPEL4WS is simply not robust enough in its current form, to be adopted by a business-centric process specification organization. The origins of BPEL4WS are from the server workflow and application integration areas. It is important to note that the needs of trading partners wishing to engage in legally binding business-centric processes are completely different from the processes required to integrate applications, or internal workflows. The current BPEL4WS does not support the business semantic needs of B2B trading, and this is why RosettaNet cannot express its PIPs (ebusiness process specifications) in BPEL4WS (Disclaimer: these are only my opinions and not any views expressed by RosettaNet).

Currently, RosettaNet is the only concrete and effective XML-based B2B framework (100s of implementations, billions of dollars worth of transactions), and I think it should have the clout to engage BPEL to work together and make BPEL more robust for B2B. Only when this happens will RosettaNet be technically able to support the expression of its PIPs in multiple business process languages.